Listen to the article
Vice President Vance Delivers Blunt Defense of Wife Against Critics
Vice President JD Vance has issued an unfiltered defense of his wife Usha, stating that anyone who attacks her “can eat s—,” regardless of their political affiliation. The pointed remarks came during a recent interview with news outlet UnHerd.
“Anyone who attacks my wife, whether their name is Jen Psaki or Nick Fuentes, can eat s—. That’s my official policy as vice president of the United States,” Vance declared, according to a transcript of the conversation.
The vice president’s comments highlight growing tensions surrounding personal attacks against political figures’ family members, a phenomenon that has intensified in recent years across the American political landscape.
Vance specifically referenced two critics from opposite ends of the political spectrum. Nick Fuentes is a controversial podcaster widely characterized as a white nationalist with antisemitic views, while Jen Psaki served as White House press secretary during the Biden administration and now hosts a show on MS NOW.
Fuentes has repeatedly targeted the second lady with derogatory comments on social media. In November, he posted “Poo-sha Vance” on X (formerly Twitter) and has used ethnic slurs when referring to her. In another instance, Fuentes wrote: “When conservatives attack Zohran Mamdani for being a foreigner, I just want them to keep the same energy with Vivek Ramaswamy and Usha Vance. Let’s be consistent.”
This comment appeared to deliberately misrepresent Usha Vance’s citizenship status. While New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani was born in Uganda and later naturalized as a U.S. citizen, both Usha Vance and former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy were born in the United States.
From the left, Psaki made controversial remarks during a podcast appearance that many interpreted as condescending toward the second lady. “Are you OK? Please… blink four times… come over here… we’ll save you,” Psaki said, suggesting Usha might be in an uncomfortable situation in her marriage.
When asked during the UnHerd interview if he disavows Fuentes, Vice President Vance responded: “My attitude towards anybody who is calling for judging people based on their ethnic heritage, whether they’re Jewish or white or anything else, it’s disgusting. We shouldn’t be doing it.”
Vance went on to downplay Fuentes’ significance, stating, “I think that Nick Fuentes, his influence within Donald Trump’s administration, and within a whole host of institutions on the Right, is vastly overstated — and frankly, it’s overstated by people who want to avoid having a foreign-policy conversation about America’s relationship with Israel.”
The vice president’s forceful defense of his wife comes amid heightened scrutiny of political figures’ personal relationships and family dynamics. Political spouses have increasingly found themselves targets of criticism, mockery, and in some cases, outright hostility from opponents across the political spectrum.
Public attacks on political spouses are not new in American politics, but social media has amplified such critiques, allowing them to spread rapidly and reach wider audiences. The Vance situation illustrates how family members of high-ranking officials can become proxies for political attacks, regardless of their own involvement in policy decisions.
Neither Fuentes nor Psaki has publicly responded to Vance’s comments. Fox News Digital reports reaching out to both parties for comment.
The second couple’s relationship has previously made headlines during the 2024 campaign, with the vice president consistently emphasizing the strength of their marriage amid public scrutiny and criticism.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
Attacking a politician’s family members is a low blow, regardless of their political affiliation. Vance’s blunt response highlights the need for more civility in politics.
Indeed. Personal attacks against spouses or children of public figures should be off-limits. Vance’s defense, while understandable, could have been expressed more diplomatically.
The vice president’s comments underscore the growing toxicity in American politics. While defending one’s family is admirable, the language used was unnecessarily confrontational.
I agree. Vance’s reaction, while coming from a place of understandable emotion, sets a poor example for civil discourse. More nuanced responses would be preferable from public officials.
Vance’s defense of his wife is understandable, but the language he used is quite heated. Political discourse should remain civil, even when defending one’s family.
I agree. While the attacks on his wife are unacceptable, the vice president’s response was rather inflammatory. A more measured tone would have been preferable.
While I sympathize with Vance’s desire to defend his wife, the vice president’s response was overly aggressive. Political discourse should remain civil, even when defending one’s family.
I agree. Vance’s comments, though understandable, set a poor example for how public officials should respond to personal attacks. A more measured tone would have been preferable.
Vance’s heated response to critics of his wife is concerning. While protecting one’s family is admirable, the vice president’s language was unnecessarily confrontational.
Absolutely. Vance’s blunt message, while coming from a place of understandable emotion, was not the most constructive approach. Political leaders should strive for more civil discourse, even in the face of personal attacks.
Vance’s blunt message highlights the need for stronger protections against attacks on political figures’ family members. However, the vice president’s choice of words was quite inflammatory.
You make a fair point. Defending one’s spouse is natural, but the vice president’s language was unnecessarily combative. A more diplomatic approach could have been more effective.